Bike lanes get a lot of opposition. Are there *any* sets of criteria (that bike lanes could meet) that would satisfy? Are there any that would satisfy VC people? Or others? Or you?

Are there good bike lanes?

If so, what do they look like?

(Or if none exist, but could, then what would they look like?)

***
Would it be satisfactory if other criteria were met (in addition to good bike lane design)? -- such as increased levels of cyclist-education and skill development; maintenance or improvement of rights for roadway use by cyclists; accompanying laws that would make a difference? Certain policies? Anything?

***
A variety of results and effects have accompanied the creation of more bike lanes. Are any of the effects seen anywhere good effects?

***
Have actual surveys been done in Portland (or other cities) to determine some of the actual (rather than speculated or imagined) effects and their extents?

Maybe there are some people here on this forum who can comment on some of this -- how bike lanes have affected their riding and their communities, etc., and how they perceive and feel about them, what messages they send to the public, or to you as part of the public....

Wide means 6'. Well maintained means regular sweeping to avoid any notable build up and special sweeping for after storms (debris or snow)

I don't prefer this over a WOL on same road, but would not be against having the stripe as long as the maintenance was well planned and there would not be intersections added in the future and if they were they would be properly dealt with by ending the BL stripe 200' before those intersections.

Wide means 6'. Well maintained means regular sweeping to avoid any notable build up and special sweeping for after storms (debris or snow)

I don't prefer this over a WOL on same road, but would not be against having the stripe as long as the maintenance was well planned and there would not be intersections added in the future and if they were they would be properly dealt with by ending the BL stripe 200' before those intersections.

Al

I would probably not even complain about bike lanes if they all met noisebeam's standards, but I still wouldn't call them "good".

A "good" bike lane is one where the condition would not be improved if the bike lane stripe was removed.

Maybe on a freeway or a freeway-like road with long intersectionless sections with 65+ mph traffic. Maybe.

Not really, Portland has done counts of the # of cyclist crossing bridges. Then some people have tried to use those counts to claim that bikelanes = more cyclist and less accidents. Portland and no other proper study has shown improved safety or increased overall cyclist from bikelanes.

Note: of the 4 bridge counts Portland did, only one bridge had a bikelane across it, while 2 other bridges had sidewalks that were simply renamed as MUPs and 1 bridge had its sidewalk widened and then named as a MUP (even though the thing did not meet current MUP design). On the bridge with the bikelane, cycling numbers at best stayed the same and at worst went down after the bikelane was painted on the bridge.

Portland bikelane proponents claim that the bridge count went up on the 3 MUP bridges because of bikelanes (even though there are no bikelanes on these bridges). My guess is that the bridge counts went up on these bridges because when the sidewalks were called sidewalks, most cyclist understood that they were not for cycling. Then by calling the things MUPs, the city conveyed to cyclist that it was OK to ride on these particular sidewalks.

I'm not fond of using any bike lanes, but I will use them depending on traffic conditions. As stated by other forumites and by my personal experiences, that motorists give far less passing clearance when there is bike lane present than when one is not. I definitely feel less comfortable riding in a bike lane, and I prefer riding on a wide roadway or one with a wide and well maintained marked shoulder.

Al's description is so good, others (including yours truly) only had to say "me too".

Quote:

I would probably not even complain about bike lanes if they all met noisebeam's standards,

Quote:

I also would not bother opposing bikelanes that followed noisebeam's standards.

And what are illuminating descriptions provided by the pro-bl folks?

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbhikes

Certainly some bike lanes are very good

And what do they look like? Who knows...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rando

bike lanes are good if you find they are beneficial to you...

Oh, I see... Not.

The inability of a bl supports to describe what a "good" bl looks like speaks volumes.
I can't wait for a photo from Bek showing some snippet of a road with a decent looking short stretch of bl, like that shows anything.

The inability of a bl supports to describe what a "good" bl looks like speaks volumes.
I can't wait for a photo from Bek showing some snippet of a road with a decent looking short stretch of bl, like that shows anything.

I didn't provide a description, Head, because Al had already provided a good one. why do you care about someone else's reply to the OP? Don't create division where there is none.

__________________"Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world". ~Grant Petersen

Cyclists fare best when they recognize that there are times when acting vehicularly is not the best practice, and are flexible enough to do what is necessary as the situation warrants.--Me

There are several thousand miles of "bike lanes" on the Interstate highway shoulders in the western US. Where else can you get a bike lane 6 to 8 feet wide with no pedestrians, no horses, no pets, very few other bikes, and a tailwind in whatever direction you are going? In Colorado some of the Interstate shoulders had signs for the motorists saying the shoulders were used by cyclists definately making that section of road between Denver and Colorado Springs a bike lane.

The inability of a bl supports to describe what a "good" bl looks like speaks volumes.

Get off. If their opinion was "most bike lanes are good," which it may be, then describing the variety of situations that can create a good bike lane would take up a page. How long is your definition of a bad bike lane?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ken cummings

In Colorado some of the Interstate shoulders had signs for the motorists saying the shoulders were used by cyclists definately making that section of road between Denver and Colorado Springs a bike lane.

That's interesting. Every freeway I've seen has a very different sign at its entrances.

Not really, Portland has done counts of the # of cyclist crossing bridges. Then some people have tried to use those counts to claim that bikelanes = more cyclist and less accidents. Portland and no other proper study has shown improved safety or increased overall cyclist from bikelanes.

Note: of the 4 bridge counts Portland did, only one bridge had a bikelane across it, while 2 other bridges had sidewalks that were simply renamed as MUPs and 1 bridge had its sidewalk widened and then named as a MUP (even though the thing did not meet current MUP design). On the bridge with the bikelane, cycling numbers at best stayed the same and at worst went down after the bikelane was painted on the bridge.

Portland bikelane proponents claim that the bridge count went up on the 3 MUP bridges because of bikelanes (even though there are no bikelanes on these bridges). My guess is that the bridge counts went up on these bridges because when the sidewalks were called sidewalks, most cyclist understood that they were not for cycling. Then by calling the things MUPs, the city conveyed to cyclist that it was OK to ride on these particular sidewalks.

But aren't the bridges just a convenient place to count cyclists? That is, regardless of the bridges themselves, if you wanted to count the number of cyclists in Portland, a good place to do this is at bridges, where cyclists are forced to cross in just a few places.

Were bike paths created in the areas around the bridges, or was the study just about the bridge facilities?

Yes, the bridges are a convenient place to count cyclists. But what data does it yield?

Since all 4 bridges are on the east Portland side, they can only count cyclist coming from the east suburbs. So is the increase on 3 of the bridges do to the growing suburbs. Probably, and would have likely occurred without bike lanes. But we cannot tell because the data has not been normalized to growth or modal split. Why did the 1 bridge with a bike lane not have any increase (but a decrease after the bike lane was painted)?

How do bridge counts tell you if more people living in Portland are riding bikes? The answer is that it does not.

Case study analysis of a bicycle plan that was implemented in Irvine, California. Evaluation of the plan and its results is according to the criteria derived from the literature review and by comparisons to the bicycle plan that was implemented in Portland, Oregon.

Irvine is a place with near-optimal conditions for bicycling, such as suitable geographical and weather characteristics. It is a new city that had a bicycle plan incorporated into its general plan. It has very few physical or planning constraints. Around 80% of the proposed infrastructure is already completed, and Irvine’s population has high potential for bicycling. Nevertheless the percentage of bicycling in Irvine is not higher than the national or regional rates. Portland, as opposed to Irvine, has succeeded in raising the percentage of bicycling in the city.

Bike lanes get a lot of opposition. Are there *any* sets of criteria (that bike lanes could meet) that would satisfy? Are there any that would satisfy VC people? Or others? Or you?

....

Here in Minneapolis we have a couple of bike paths that all types of cyclists choose to use over the adjacent roadways. And I mean all kinds, be they DUI guy with the turned up handlebars, sans bell racerboy, or Burley hauling soccer mom. One looks like this (the midtown greenway):
Dedicated directional bike only lanes and dedicated ped lane. Limited grade level crossings and on off ramps to return to motor vehicle allowed traffic roads. The adjacent road way is a four lane urban commercial district with lights at each intersection and 30 mph speed limit. I bet a bike could cross border to border in Minneapolis on the Greenway in about 75% the time that a car could do the same on the Lake Street (mostly due to congestion and prevalent traffic control devices).